If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

psychobabbling

After some initial doubt, I've for several reasons decided to start this topic. Most likely it will die a silent and unmourned death. We shall see.

First I want myself and the closet-sextourists to get out of each others' hair. I can't abide the fourletter words, the bad spelling, braggings and "I almost made it" stories, spiced with expressions like "hot babes" etc. On the other hand the !!!!WOW!!! types do not like words with many syl-lab-les, so here such is concentrated in one place, which they can avoid. In other words, the contributers to this topic can, without interference, bore each other to death, if we wish to.

Next: Having a soft spot for conspiracy theories I'm convinced, that not only anti-scammers read anti-scam sites, a lot of other groups do it also. The scammers themselves, agency representatives, ultrafeminists (just-hating-men-on-general-principles), chatters (having nothing to say, but doing it with many words) and those just curious. The possibilty of disinformation is real, but maybe it's possible to suppress it by being longwinded and circumstantial.

And last, the most important. Internet-dating is after all only one aspect of the the eternal "war of the sexes". To understand net-dating, I believe it's necessary to paint a broader background canvas. Say, are we just a bunch of grumpy querulants or is there really a difference between not being able to get along with your next-door childhood love and a FSUW? Where and what is the difference? Even without a computer, a different cultural background or alcoholism, Sue-Ellen could still be a conartist or pro-dater. Especially if she's good-looking.

I'm not completely sceptical about FSU dating (internet or not). In the last app. 18 years I've had three longer relationships (in the biblical sense) with SFUW, lasting alltogether 14 years. These relationships broke up for the same personal reasons, as any other relationships do. And I've had my share of scandinavian psychos. For me the question is the PROBABILITY of meeting "straights" or "bends" in each group.

So I invite for wievs on this. And I have a few proposals for background-basics:

I believe, that we like all other animals fundamentally are biological robots. We have a digestive system with two openings, a need to reproduce and to fight for a place in a predatory system. That's our startingpoint. But compared to other animals, we also have rather complex emotions and intellect. We have a possibility, individually or culturally, to be more than just reptile-brained. And different individuals/cultures/subcultures use this possibility in various degrees.

And I also suggest to sort out the differences between women and men. For the present bunch of probably half-machos it's maybe an idiotic question. But believe me, in this time of unisex, feminism, equal opportunities and so on, the issue has seriously, repeatedly and heatedly been raised, if there IS any difference (in spite of different plumbing and men's inability to get pregnant). I strongly support the idea, that women and men are almost different species, and as in any other contact with ETs, we need a lot of diplomacy to establish peaceful contact.

quote:Pleeease, PeopleS. Even peasants like me have so much knowledge of US. I always found the McCarthy regime on par with the sovjet's worst exaggerations.

Persoally, I would say more along the lines of the Spanish Inquisition or even a good old fashioned Salem 'witch hunt'. But the fear was instilled within the masses none the less.

quote:With all respect, your and my definition of what a "bit" is differs radically. I consider these people to have passed over the border to criminal behaviour.

A little bit of sarcasm.[)] Still, I honestly feel that these people really, in some cases, don't realize that what they're doing is that wrong. It's become a way of life and it's excepted. Many see it as a victimless crime. No one got hurt, so what's the big deal? Changing attitudes is a giant leap. How to do it is beyond me at this point.

quote:What I tried to do in my own situation with my "fianc?e", was to stop her as much as I could.

Some people, you just can't reach. Trust me, I know. I only hope I won't just give up on the next one because of past frustrations.

On a lighter side, since I have finally finished wrapping the walls, ceilings and floors of my apartment with tin foil, I have a site for you to check out. hot russian brides. As I continue to look for possible scam sites, I came across this gem. With only minimal info in my free profile and no photos posted, I have received over 80 messages in 3 days! Mostly from the 18 to 22 crowd. Also, once logged in, you are constantly bombarded with an in house pop-up of girls online who would like to chat with you. If you go to check this site out, be sure to look at their rapes... I mean rates for opening letters of correspondence.[V]

"Changing attitudes is a giant leap. How to do it is beyond me at this point."

As promised, I will start on this track in a few days.

"With only minimal info in my free profile and no photos posted, I have received over 80 messages in 3 days!"

But it does give one such a lovely, warm feeling to be needed.

Now to Elena:

Our present scriptwriter is out of whisky and is making himself difficult, in spite of having his blown fuse changed for a new one.

So we asked the janitor here at the office, who takes evening classes in literature, to help us out with this week's episode.

The story of Elena. Episode umpteenth.

Elena is now down with acute anti-scam. She lies in her bed at home, looking pale and lovely. She has been kicked out of the monastery after a stormy affair with the abbot, who, as abbots go, has a dubious morality concerning both pleasures of the flesh and how to use the monastery's funds. But Elena really DID need that necklace. It was sooo glittery.

So the abbot still lives in a cell, though not in the monastery, but in a different kind of place. And our Elena, being refused admittance by all nunneries for miles around, because of the usual inefficiency of bureaucrats everywhere, has been forced to move back to her simple 5 room flat.

Her grandmother's hearttransplantation has failed, and she now needs cryogenic preservation, waiting for better times. And such costs. So Elena is at her wits end.

But in the deepest of darkness, light sometimes arises. The flat next door has been leased to an american doctor on holiday, and Elena makes some discreet inquieries about the possibility, that he's a sex-tourist. This not being the case, Elena asks the doctor, if he can help her fight her anti-scam infection.

He arrives at her flat bringing all the tools of his trade and prepares to take her pulse, bloodpressure, temperature and whatever doctors usually take.

Elena informs him, that you do not take bloodpressure on the arm in Ukraine. It's taken on the upper part of the leg. The doctor, who has never been out of Iowa before, thinks this is strange, but when in Rome..........! But he tells her, that she must remove her suspenders first.

Psychobabbling being audio-visual, only without the audio or visual parts, must rely on telling our readers, what happens.

(Camera zooms in).

Soft music and shadows moving in the dark.

The next day the fee for grandmother's cryogenic preservation is paid by the american doctor. Grandmother can now safely stay deepfrozen the next 50 years. Ofcourse Elena has a special arrangement with the owner of the cryogenic clinic, and together they thaw out grandmother and put her back in virtual reality, where she will feel much better.

After a week the doctor goes back to Iowa, feeling somewhat confused, not knowing what has happened or if he's engaged and where his visa-card is.

Elena thinks it would be a wonderful idea to live in USA. The land of swimmingpools and milk and honey and, and ..... swimmingpools.

quote:And is it therfore believed that had Hitler conquered all of Europe that he would have said, "Okay, I love England so gosh darned much that I'll just leave them be?"

he was enamoured with it. There is no explanation but he was (based on silly XIX century concepts. He was aping the "white man's burden" ).

quote:How big would that "portion" of nazified Europe have been had they won? At what border would they have stopped? Italy maybe? Heck, the Nazis were in north Africa! They were fighting to control sand, camel dropping and absolutely NO natural resourses. No, Hitler was a maniac and had to be stopped at all costs. Can you imagine what might have happened if he had control of "the bomb" prior to his defeat?

No bigger than the soviet portion. Communism took up more than half the world, from China to Angola. Is it too much?
Nazis came to Africa to help Italy & control oil resources & a strategic gateway to Asia.

quote:Unlike the USSR and the US, I believe that this man would have deemed millions upon millions as "acceptable" losses in an all out nuclear war, as long as he thought he would win.

While Americans threw only 2 bombs on Japan out of philanthropy and not because - as it is known- they had only 2 and wanted to avoid losses on THEIR end.
About "millions", Stalin murdered more of his compatriots than Hitler did enemies.

quote:As for Dresden... a major mistake that should have never happened. I agree that it was inexcusable and I have no clue, evidence or theory to support what Churchill did there.

The reason was plain terrorism.
But hey, Hitler could have excused himself too for "inexcusable mistakes" had he won.
He was too attached to XIX century ideals like lebensraum.
Napoleon, however, was on the other side of the spectrum but fared not better.

quote:In Ukraine, the secondhand shops are few and far between, and the average ukrainian refuses to put her/his foot inside such a place. Not because of bad quality of the goods, but because of status-downgrading, if you are caught doing it. I had a couple of real rows with my "fianc?e" about it, where she ended up crying, because of "what would people say about her, if they knew, that her boyfriend shopped secondhand".

well, although here at the time they preached affluence, i always shopped hardcore. I knew the bubble of (unsubstantiated) affluence would soon burst.
Europe has no oil, coal or uranium so it's easy to see how.
I never bought used clothes, but i shopped hardcore for groceries etc since i can remember; savings have been huge.
I also remember people approaching me like a beggar a long time ago asking whether those groceries "were eatable"...
I never bought a new car this far, but i have no debts as well.
People who laughed at me probably deal with repossession, overdue bills and credit disasters right now; i pay every bill long before due and had never any credit problem: i am debt-free.
Do i am rich? no way; as i said, you cannot have it all.
Sure, you cannot have BOTH the latest gadget AND save money; you cannot BOTH turn heads AND be debt-free...unless you are extremely wealthy or powerful.
I prefer aurea mediocritas in peace rather than papier-mache VIP lifestyle struggling to make ends meet: wait for the first rain (repossession, credit crisis, unexpected events ) and your papier-mache pantheon turns to mud in no time.

This explains how i might be an unsuitable candidate for cyber FSU-MOBs daydreaming of swimming pools, six figures income, emmy awards, rolls royces, brick&mortar A+ colleges and fortnightly vacations to five stars exotic resorts.

quote:he was enamoured with it. There is no explanation but he was (based on silly XIX century concepts. He was aping the "white man's burden" ).

So basically, you honestly believe that had Hitler conquered all of Europe, the middle east, and northern Africa, while still harboring designs for the eventual invasion of Russia, that he was so "enamoured" with England that he would have left the nation sovereign. Okay???

quote:No bigger than the soviet portion. Communism took up more than half the world, from China to Angola.

And again, I blame FDR who still had sufficient military might at his disposal for not backing Churchill, you blame Churchill who's armies had been so battered for seven years and stood zero chance of stopping Russia from marching into Buckingham Palace had Stalin so desired. To me, that's like calling the skinny kid who barely survived a fight with one bully, only because his big brother and another bully helped, a whimp for negotiating his lunch money away to keep his teeth when the second bully starts pushing him and big brother turned his back.

quote:While Americans threw only 2 bombs on Japan out of philanthropy and not because - as it is known- they had only 2 and wanted to avoid losses on THEIR end.
About "millions", Stalin murdered more of his compatriots than Hitler did enemies.

The fact is that Truman had hoped that one bomb would have been enough, thus the days between bombings. It was Hirohito's delay that brought about the dropping of the second bomb. And yes, the hope was to save American lives that would have been lost had the US invaded mainland Japan. The post bomb horrors were also far greater than anyone had predicted including Oppenheimer.

But again, it seems to me that you believe Adolph Hitler, a pure megalomaniac who had working missiles, would not have used nukes to acheive his goal of world conquest. Again, all I can say is okay???

After a week the doctor goes back to Iowa, feeling somewhat confused, not knowing what has happened or if he's engaged and where his visa-card is....

Unfortunately, the good doctor develops an unexplained rash in his nether region a few days after returning to Iowa and now must enlist the help of a friend, of a friend, of a friend to obtain certain ointments as not to raise the suspicions of his shrew American wife who thought he was attending a medical convention in Jersey.

Elena, meanwhile, purchases a brand new laptop courtesy the good doctor's visa and is back in business. One might think her first order of business would be to post a few profiles, but instead she logs onto [u]swimming pool screensavers for the true necessities.

The next day after posting her profile on [u]RBrides.com Elena receives a notice that her profile is being removed as a scammer. Truly horrified at the prospect of having to refreeze her virtual granny, Elena does what any good scammer would. She changes her name to Alena and resubmits her profile with a new home city and the same old photos.

All is right with the world as she begins receiving message after message from Barney, Kamala and Wong...

Pleased and content, she falls asleep holding her new laptop in her arms as a lovely heart shaped inground swimming pool dances across her screen...

As we fade out on our sleeping beauty, we fade in on the good doctor applying his newly gotten ointment to his nether region when his wife walks in...

quote:But again, it seems to me that you believe Adolph Hitler, a pure megalomaniac who had working missiles, would not have used nukes to acheive his goal of world conquest. Again, all I can say is okay???

i do not think he'd use them on Britain or France; USSR, likely in some relatively remote place. Remember the man was a nature freak, a vegetarian & stuff like that.

quote:And again, I blame FDR who still had sufficient military might at his disposal for not backing Churchill, you blame Churchill who's armies had been so battered for seven years and stood zero chance of stopping Russia from marching into Buckingham Palace had Stalin so desired. To me, that's like calling the skinny kid who barely survived a fight with one bully, only because his big brother and another bully helped, a whimp for negotiating his lunch money away to keep his teeth when the second bully starts pushing him and big brother turned his back.

you make a big mistake here.
Only because they settled on the same side, it does not mean they shared the exact same agenda.
America wanted to insure war supplies would be paid back, and reacted to Japan's challenge in the pacific region.
Far from them to orchestrate bogus European plans like Churchill did.
Italy had not the same agenda as Germany, or Japan.
In fact they had agreed to divide the world into 3 separate areas on influence right because one's policies, goals or rhetoric were not necessarily shared by the others, notwithstanding some important agreements.
Britain was back then THE world superpower, forget skinny kids.
It dragged along a convoy of dozens of satellite countries.
Italy & Germany barely assembled a few like Bulgaria, Hungary etc.
In spite of that, it appears fascist countries were more straightforward and loyal to one another: Germany transferred most of its secrets to Japan.

You then seem to forget America had no ideologic basis; while Churchill thought Germany was a threat to the empire, America was far from that.
Hell, they even quibbled over declaring war to America, which was done because things were out of control and to back Japan up; Italy in particular was very reticent to do so because of the huge Italian communities in America.
"The enemies of my enemy are my friends": it never got farther than that.
Why would America, that had gotten half of the cake at virtually no cost, enter another war?
First, none thought (stupidly) about what'd happen next; second, if they had gotten half the cake with almost no effort, why would they start going to slaughter over what, Poland? Jews ?
None really cared.
Only much later was Morgenthau (jewish zionist & US prominent politician ) given credit, foreseeing the huge returns on the guilt card; earlier he was handled simply as an eccentric buffoon.
Did they really know nothing of concentration camps?
Please...
They knew about the most secret plans shared among a few top officials only, and ignored squared miles of open space, open air camps packed with millions of inmates etc.
Camps were destined to fade in the mist of time, much like post-war allied camps (where some sources claim millions of Germans died )...have you ever heard of allied camps?
No, and if you have, it was the "tea & biscuits" tale you heard i suppose.
Dresden, Hiroshima, Nagasaki, etc...sure, a few indignant lines here & there, but hey...you cannot clean house without breaking some glasses, can you?

quote:i do not think he'd use them on Britain or France; USSR, likely in some relatively remote place. Remember the man was a nature freak, a vegetarian & stuff like that.

Had Hitler been one tenth the social minded humanitarian you make him out to be with such concern for England, why did he bomb them?

quote:you make a big mistake here.
Only because they settled on the same side, it does not mean they shared the exact same agenda.

The point isn't who had what agenda. The point is that had the US backed England against the Soviets, the Soviets wouldn't have occuppied eastern Europe for 60 years.

Your knowledge of European history is admirable, but as for what the US was doing in WWII and why falls a little short in some respects. The US public didn't want to get invovled in the war. We were in the middle of a depression, and isolationism was the order of the day. FDR desparately wanted to get into the war because he knew the war machine would jump start the economy. Churchill had also emplored that the US help, but FDR's hands were politically tied. "It wasn't our war".

He needed an excuse! The Japanese sent an envoy to Washington to negotiate a treaty with the US prior to the attack on Pearl Harbor, but was turned away. After Pearl Harbor, FDR had what he needed to win approval of the public to enter the war. Basically FDR allowed the Japanese to bomb the Pacific fleet. Why do you think most of our carriers were not at dock??? It wasn't a coincidence. The damage to the base was much heavier than anticipated, but salvagable. The US declared war Japan and on Germany soon after, so it didn't really matter if Hitler declared war on the US or not.

Bottom line is the US wanted to get into the war.

Bottom line is that had the US backed England against Russia, we wouldn't be having this debate because we had the bomb and Russia didn't yet. But something else that may not be in your European history books is that FDR had several secret meetings with Stalin that did not include Churchill. It's been pieced together that FDR gave eastern Europe to Stalin long before the war was over in Europe.

Here's your agenda. FDR gave away eastern Europe as reparations to Stalin for the devistating losses the Russians took on the eastern front.

quote:Your knowledge of European history is admirable, but as for what the US was doing in WWII and why falls a little short in some respects. The US public didn't want to get invovled in the war. We were in the middle of a depression, and isolationism was the order of the day. FDR desparately wanted to get into the war because he knew the war machine would jump start the economy. Churchill had also emplored that the US help, but FDR's hands were politically tied. "It wasn't our war".

i know all that, and as I said, getting repayments for war supplies and getting the most of the cake with minimal effort (=what really happened).
Fighting USSR would jeopardize this strategy of maximal gains with minimal losses.
Losses would skyrocket, what for?
To reinstate Britain as world power?
For Poland?
None cared to start with.
I'm not saying it was right, but as with WWI, maximal gains with minimal losses.
The same strategy Mussolini wanted to follow: enter the war, loose a few men and seven week later be a victor.
The clash with Japan was unavoidable in the Pacific region, even if no serious attempt was made to avert war. Again: unwillingness to compromise.
Americans never go to slaughter to save others; they enter the war late, let others do most of the job, get paid for war supplies they produce in peace at home and get much of the cake afterwards.
Can you possibly be wiser?
Japan could as well have occupied Hawaii, but (as with Hitler & Britain ) they probably never wanted a real all-out war with America; only to make sure they got green light in Asia & the pacific region, much like Hitler never dreamt to disassemble the British empire; diminish it, yes.

quote:Had Hitler been one tenth the social minded humanitarian you make him out to be with such concern for England, why did he bomb them?

Sincere or not, Hitler's plea to spare civilian cities was ignored; Italy waited during the first stage of the war, always in an attempt to reach a compromise, but Italian cities were bombed first.
Never forget Hitler sent his heir Hess to England in 1941.
He never stopped pleading with them, while (stupidly) ignoring Stalin's offers.
I'm not sure, but I read on one history book Stalin at one time would accept the rank of co-belligerent (second class ally ) in exchange for some influence in Asia.
Silly to refuse.
Japan made the horrible mistake NEVER to attack USSR.
They were paid back when USSR attacked Japan in the terminal phase of the war.